Here is an interesting case of publicizing one’s DNA:

A woman’s DNA test-inspired tattoo has received mixed reviews from critics.

Many thought that the tattoo was “stupid” and one even felt that it was worse than the infamous “no regerts” ink.

An anonymous Redditor shared the tattoo they stumbled across in a forum.

“[SAD], getting a tattoo of your Ancestry.com results,” they said.

A woman proudly showed off her heritage results, inked on her arm and complete with the Ancestry.com logo.

“42% Scandinavian, 26% Native American, 24% European, 8% Asian,” the tattoo said in large letters.

Critics shared their thoughts on the tattoos in the comments.

“That’s it, we found it, the stupidest f**king tattoo ever,” said one commenter.

“Even worse than ‘No Regerts,’ at least that’s funny.”

“Honestly, this is it. This is Peak Stupid,” agreed another.

Some felt that there were lots of flaws in getting a heritage test tattoo, including vague and inconclusive results.

“Which Asian? There are thousands of separate cultures here,” said one commenter.

Others felt that the woman had missed another percentage in her tattoo.

“And 100% stupid,” joked one commenter.

Comment by Dick Eastman: I have had my DNA tested by 5 different companies that are in the business of reporting your ancestry from the the results. 4 of the companies reported essentially the same results (with minor variations) but the fifth company initially reported that a large section of my ancestors came from an entirely different country from what the other four reported. I wonder how this woman would report that on her tattoo? 

(About a year after the first test results were reported the fifth company updated its database(s) and suddenly all my ancestors moved from that one country had now moved to join all the other ancestors as reported by the other four companies.)

I might caution a anyone about adding a public, permanent record (such as on your skin) until you are certain that you have received all the facts.